On 10/16/2015 09:04 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
BITS_RX_EN is an 'unsigned long' constant, so the ones complement of that
has bits set that do not fit into a 32-bit variable on 64-bit architectures,
which causes a harmless gcc warning:
...
static void hix5hd2_port_disable(struct hix5hd2_priv *priv)
{
- writel_relaxed(~(BITS_RX_EN | BITS_TX_EN), priv->base + PORT_EN);
+ writel_relaxed(~(u32)(BITS_RX_EN | BITS_TX_EN), priv->base + PORT_EN);
writel_relaxed(0, priv->base + DESC_WR_RD_ENA);
ISTM that just means that the constants shouldn't be 'long'.
Right, but that would probably mean changing the BIT() macro or not using it
here. In the past I've argued against using that macro, but I've given
up that fight.
Fight on... (Somebody must have gone to USC here)
There might be value in a BIT_U32 macro.
Maybe BIT_U64 too.
There's BIT_ULL() already.
MBR, Sergei
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
